Ethical Considerations in Light of the Recent E-Discovery Amendments to the Federal Rules

Electronic communications and devices have changed the way we live and work. As those changes have occurred, litigants and courts have struggled with the application of traditional discovery rules to ever-evolving forms of electronically stored information. On December 1, 2006, several important amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure took effect. These amendments explicitly modify discovery procedures to address electronically stored information or “ESI.” In particular, the changes impose express obligations on parties to preserve, disclose and produce ESI. While much already has been written about the direct impact of these changes on the discovery process, lawyers must also consider thoughtfully how the recent amendments affect their ethical obligations.

This blog/web site is made available by the contributing lawyers or law firm publisher solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general legal principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. By using this blog/Web site, you understand that there is no attorney client relationship intended or formed between you and the blog/Web site publisher or any contributing lawyer. The blog/Web site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.

K&L Gates practices out of 48 fully integrated offices located in the United States, Asia, Australia, Europe, the Middle East and South America and represents leading global corporations, growth and middle-market companies, capital markets participants and entrepreneurs in every major industry group as well as public sector entities, educational institutions, philanthropic organizations and individuals. For more information about K&L Gates or its locations, practices and registrations, visit www.klgates.com.

Portions of this Web site may contain Attorney Advertising under the rules of some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.